| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID:
<PAXPR04MB8510D86B82F03530769569958850A@PAXPR04MB8510.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 02:08:09 +0000
From: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
To: Frank Li <frank.li@....com>
CC: "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>, "krzk+dt@...nel.org"
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, "conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>, Claudiu Manoil
<claudiu.manoil@....com>, Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, Clark
Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>, "andrew+netdev@...n.ch"
<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "kuba@...nel.org"
<kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev" <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>, "s.hauer@...gutronix.de"
<s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>, "F.S.
Peng" <fushi.peng@....com>, "devicetree@...r.kernel.org"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 net-next 12/14] net: enetc: add PTP synchronization
support for ENETC v4
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 12:35:10PM +0000, Wei Fang wrote:
> > > > +static void enetc_set_one_step_ts(struct enetc_si *si, bool udp, int
> > > > +offset) {
> > > > + u32 val = ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP_EN;
> > > > +
> > > > + val |= ENETC_SET_SINGLE_STEP_OFFSET(offset);
> > > > + if (udp)
> > > > + val |= ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP_CH;
> > > > +
> > > > + /* the "Correction" field of a packet is updated based on the
> > > > + * current time and the timestamp provided
> > > > + */
> > > > + enetc_port_mac_wr(si, ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP, val); }
> > > > +
> > > > +static void enetc4_set_one_step_ts(struct enetc_si *si, bool udp, int
> > > > +offset) {
> > > > + u32 val = PM_SINGLE_STEP_EN;
> > > > +
> > > > + val |= PM_SINGLE_STEP_OFFSET_SET(offset);
> > > > + if (udp)
> > > > + val |= PM_SINGLE_STEP_CH;
> > > > +
> > > > + enetc_port_mac_wr(si, ENETC4_PM_SINGLE_STEP(0), val); }
> > > > +
> > > > static u32 enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv,
> > > > struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -234,7 +259,6 @@ static u32 enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg(struct
> > > enetc_ndev_priv *priv,
> > > > u32 lo, hi, nsec;
> > > > u8 *data;
> > > > u64 sec;
> > > > - u32 val;
> > > >
> > > > lo = enetc_rd_hot(hw, ENETC_SICTR0);
> > > > hi = enetc_rd_hot(hw, ENETC_SICTR1); @@ -279,12 +303,10 @@
> static
> > > > u32 enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv,
> > > > *(__be32 *)(data + tstamp_off + 6) = new_nsec;
> > > >
> > > > /* Configure single-step register */
> > > > - val = ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP_EN;
> > > > - val |= ENETC_SET_SINGLE_STEP_OFFSET(corr_off);
> > > > - if (enetc_cb->udp)
> > > > - val |= ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP_CH;
> > > > -
> > > > - enetc_port_mac_wr(priv->si, ENETC_PM0_SINGLE_STEP, val);
> > > > + if (is_enetc_rev1(si))
> > > > + enetc_set_one_step_ts(si, enetc_cb->udp, corr_off);
> > > > + else
> > > > + enetc4_set_one_step_ts(si, enetc_cb->udp, corr_off);
> > >
> > > Can you use callback function to avoid change this logic when new version
> > > appear in future?
> >
> > According to Jakub's previous suggestion, there is no need to add callbacks
> > for such trivial things.
> > https://lore.kernel.org/imx/20250115140042.63b99c4f@kernel.org/
> >
> > If the differences between the two versions result in a lot of different
> > code, using a callback is more appropriate.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > return lo & ENETC_TXBD_TSTAMP;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -303,6 +325,7 @@ static int enetc_map_tx_buffs(struct enetc_bdr
> > > *tx_ring, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > unsigned int f;
> > > > dma_addr_t dma;
> > > > u8 flags = 0;
> > > > + u32 tstamp;
> > > >
> > > > enetc_clear_tx_bd(&temp_bd);
> > > > if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL) { @@ -327,6 +350,13
> @@
> > > > static int enetc_map_tx_buffs(struct enetc_bdr *tx_ring, struct sk_buff
> *skb)
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + if (enetc_cb->flag & ENETC_F_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC_TSTAMP) {
> > > > + do_onestep_tstamp = true;
> > > > + tstamp = enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg(priv, skb);
> > > > + } else if (enetc_cb->flag & ENETC_F_TX_TSTAMP) {
> > > > + do_twostep_tstamp = true;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > i = tx_ring->next_to_use;
> > > > txbd = ENETC_TXBD(*tx_ring, i);
> > > > prefetchw(txbd);
> > > > @@ -346,11 +376,6 @@ static int enetc_map_tx_buffs(struct enetc_bdr
> > > *tx_ring, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > count++;
> > > >
> > > > do_vlan = skb_vlan_tag_present(skb);
> > > > - if (enetc_cb->flag & ENETC_F_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC_TSTAMP)
> > > > - do_onestep_tstamp = true;
> > > > - else if (enetc_cb->flag & ENETC_F_TX_TSTAMP)
> > > > - do_twostep_tstamp = true;
> > > > -
> > >
> > > why need move this block up?
> >
> > Because we need check the flag to determine whether perform PTP
> > one-step, if yes, we need to call enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg() to
> > modify the sync packet before calling dma_map_single(). ENETCv4
> > do not support dma-coherent, I have explained in the commit message.
> >
> > >
> > > > tx_swbd->do_twostep_tstamp = do_twostep_tstamp;
> > > > tx_swbd->qbv_en = !!(priv->active_offloads & ENETC_F_QBV);
> > > > tx_swbd->check_wb = tx_swbd->do_twostep_tstamp ||
> > > tx_swbd->qbv_en;
> > > > @@ -393,8 +418,6 @@ static int enetc_map_tx_buffs(struct enetc_bdr
> > > *tx_ring, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > if (do_onestep_tstamp) {
> > > > - u32 tstamp = enetc_update_ptp_sync_msg(priv, skb);
> > > > -
> > > > /* Configure extension BD */
> > > > temp_bd.ext.tstamp = cpu_to_le32(tstamp);
> > > > e_flags |= ENETC_TXBD_E_FLAGS_ONE_STEP_PTP; @@
> -3314,7
> > > +3337,7 @@
> > > > int enetc_hwtstamp_set(struct net_device *ndev,
> > > > struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > > > int err, new_offloads = priv->active_offloads;
> > > >
> > > > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FSL_ENETC_PTP_CLOCK))
> > > > + if (!enetc_ptp_clock_is_enabled(priv->si))
> > > > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > >
> > > > switch (config->tx_type) {
> > > > @@ -3364,7 +3387,7 @@ int enetc_hwtstamp_get(struct net_device
> *ndev,
> > > > {
> > > > struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > > >
> > > > - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FSL_ENETC_PTP_CLOCK))
> > > > + if (!enetc_ptp_clock_is_enabled(priv->si))
> > > > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > >
> > > > if (priv->active_offloads & ENETC_F_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC_TSTAMP) diff
> > > > --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.h
> > > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.h
> > > > index c65aa7b88122..6bacd851358c 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.h
> > > > @@ -598,6 +598,14 @@ static inline void
> enetc_cbd_free_data_mem(struct
> > > > enetc_si *si, int size, void enetc_reset_ptcmsdur(struct enetc_hw
> > > > *hw); void enetc_set_ptcmsdur(struct enetc_hw *hw, u32
> > > > *queue_max_sdu);
> > > >
> > > > +static inline bool enetc_ptp_clock_is_enabled(struct enetc_si *si) {
> > > > + if (is_enetc_rev1(si))
> > > > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FSL_ENETC_PTP_CLOCK);
> > > > +
> > > > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_NETC);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > why v1 check CONFIG_FSL_ENETC_PTP_CLOCK and other check
> > > CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_NETC
> >
> > Because they use different PTP drivers, so the configs are different.
>
> But name CONFIG_FSL_ENETC_PTP_CLOCK and
> CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_NETC is quite
> similar, suppose CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_NETC should be
> CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_NETC_V4
>
Okay, it looks good
Powered by blists - more mailing lists